4/pol/ on Communism

To add, as for the chinese stuff, the poster is lying, partly. People were relocated, and this was a bad move as far as I can tell, since as a result they stayed poor. The misinformation begins with the part where he tries to say that the relocated people quickly rose back into the ranks again. He seems to be implying that this was because they were naturally superior, or something, but in reality most of them, well, stayed poor. And those that did move up and got out of the countryside generally did so out of personal connections or education, but mostly the former.

1. "appeal to nature" fallacy
2. Simply a lot of false claims. Like none of his claims here are actually true. Should I go over them one by one? Google should be enough. Also picture related, capitalism is so far the biggest disaster of a system.
3. He somehow now assumes that class identity is supposed to be some kind of driving power in communism, when he just himself noted that communism's goal is to ABOLISH classes, not make them some kind of important part of identity. What the fuck?
4. A complete strawman, and very generic at that. Again so many errors that I just freeze when I try to explain them all. Cultural marxism is literal nazi propaganda.
5. this is just an ad hominem. something someone would say when they were to read a book but were too lazy/stupid to really read it

...

Read it again. Communists did use class identity. Stalins regime used national identity to empower the class identity. To be a good Russian was to be a good proletarian. This is using something to arrive at an end. An analogy could be: you become a student to become an engineer or something, you cultivate the things that make you a good student. Not for the sake of being a good student but for the sake of arriving at your goal.

This is the one that’s primarily the human nature one. He says communism is impossible, which is a subjective. Also saying class is inevitable is somewhat false, as it hadn’t always existed, and natural is very false for the same reason.
Dialectical materialism first off, not Hegelian dialectics. It is an evolution of hegels work. 2nd it has nothing to do with constitutions, it is simply a philosophical framework by which we arrive at communist theory. Look at the policies passed by the early USSR, they pertained to organization and social emancipation, resource allocation, ect. Irrelevant argument in regard to constitutions
Arguably his worst argument. Says humans are motivated by national identity, yet this is historically inaccurate. Nations are a new phenomenon, not all that long ago people simply identified with language, culture, and locality. He then conflates these things with national identity, even though these things predate the genesis of the nation state. Furthermore language and culture transcend national borders, evidenced by various diasporas of immigrants. See the Farsi people of India as an ancient and still relevant example.
No socialist has ever said it’s perfect, it’s a step in human evolution and advancement from capitalism for sure tho. In this light, it must be tinkered with, the details hammered out. The mistake really is our fault, it’s not that “real” socialism has never been tried, it’s just that no revolution has successfully achieved it. People are willing to discount it even though only a handful of revolutions have occurred in the past 100 years out of the 200,000 year history of the human race, so IMO it’s still worth trying to get right.
Shit argument. As if capitalism is effective. We waste 2/3 of all food produced while people go hungry. We have banks kicking families out of their homes, millions of homeless people staring at empty houses. Our medical/pharmaceutical industry is redundant and derives all of its knowledge from taxpayer supported public research then pulls those ideas to fill its own bank account by bankrupting the sick. All the while it hides its progress from other companies as proprietary secrets, instead of cooperating, all to protect its profits. And our system can’t maintain itself with rhythmic and regular depressions, booms and busts. But yea let’s talk abut the inefficiencies of Marxism

1. human nature lmao, humans have always had classes and been capitalist.
historically inaccurate
2. wikipedia article summary on dialectics: and the a priori truths that marxism is destroying everything is never backed up.
3.doesnt understand spooks, and uses wwi, which is when THE FUCKING RUSSIAN REVOLUTION TOOK PLACE, to say that nationalism takes a bigger role than class. also tries to apply all of dialectical materialism onto the thinkings of a man a lot of us disagree with.
4.one huge strawman, where he falls for a nazi propaganda technique (cultural marxism) and he makes claims that all leftists think the exact same way because he saw a couple on reddit or whatever. doesnt understand lumpenproles either.
5. how exactly can a philosophy be ineffective? then he says its complex so he doesnt really need to understand (as he demonstrated in the past 4 points) to criticize it.

this is a big sum of "things have always been like this, we cant change now!" for the first 2 points and a complete strawmanning and misinterpretation of marx;cleaely fained from watching some right wing echo chamber's 15 minute youtube video on it.

Holla Forums likes things simple (humans vs orcs, Autism Level = all intelligence, race is split up and in perfect boxes based on muh aesthetics, etc.); if its not simple, they reject it.

On top of the other criticisms pointed out here, he just regurgitates common points about the Marxist-Leninist countries as if they’re an accurate representation of what Marx wanted, while also not understanding that Marx did not invent socialism nor is his school the only one in the left.

Blatant lie. The reason the USSR reverted to capitalism was exactly that the elites felt they did not have nearly enough wealth, privilege and so on. Their standard of living was that of people making maybe 250.000 $ in today's money.

If the post opens with such an enormity of a propagandist falsehood, I'm not even going to bother with the rest.

Evolution is something that bacteria and sometimes insects do.

It's a new phenomenon that has accompanied global travel.

Nazi meme

Under communism only workers get to eat. Everyone else has to beg.

Yet a priori assumptions that capitalism destroys everything are perfectly OK.

We can't observe any other examples of socialism scaling to large populations. Dialectics amirite?

That’s not a proper Marxist stance on capitalism.

1) Only a very small few of the many tendencies have ever been attempted or supported by revolutionaries.
2) The ones that have besides M-L were put down militarily.